[Don Pearce[_3_]]

A tic is a spasm of the facial muscles. A short sharp sound is a TICK
- like what a clock does.

Thank you - happy now.

d

[Tom McCreadie]

A tic is a spasm of the facial muscles. A short sharp sound is a TICK
- like what a clock does.

And while we're on a roll, could the whole usenet/web-forum world now
please stop saying "revert back" instead of "revert" and "loose" when
they mean "lose" .
--
Tom McCreadie

Live at The London Palindrome - ABBA

[Gareth Magennis]

"Tom McCreadie" wrote in message
...
A tic is a spasm of the facial muscles. A short sharp sound is a TICK
- like what a clock does.

And while we're on a roll, could the whole usenet/web-forum world now
please stop saying "revert back" instead of "revert" and "loose" when
they mean "lose" .
--
Tom McCreadie

Live at The London Palindrome - ABBA


And PLEASE learn the difference between "their", "there" and "they're".
It will only take 2 minutes. Really.




Gareth.

[Audio1]

On 6/29/2011 4:59 AM, Gareth Magennis wrote:
"Tom wrote in message
...
A tic is a spasm of the facial muscles. A short sharp sound is a TICK
- like what a clock does.

And while we're on a roll, could the whole usenet/web-forum world now
please stop saying "revert back" instead of "revert" and "loose" when
they mean "lose" .
--
Tom McCreadie

Live at The London Palindrome - ABBA


And PLEASE learn the difference between "their", "there" and "they're".
It will only take 2 minutes. Really.




Gareth.

'Phase' / 'Polarity'

(dives for cover)

[Mike Rivers]

On 6/29/2011 7:29 AM, Audio1 wrote:

And please stop using unnecessary apostrophe's like this?

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[William Sommerwerck]

How about prohibiting any and all uses of "impact" (verb or noun)? There are
more-appropriate words.

[William Sommerwerck]

'Phase' / 'Polarity'

No argument whatever. They are not the same.

[Tom McCreadie]

And PLEASE learn the difference between "their", "there" and "they're".

Yes, they also make me grimace.
Is a tic just a grimace with a short attack and release time? :-)
--
Tom McCreadie

[Frank Stearns]

(Don Pearce) writes:

A tic is a spasm of the facial muscles. A short sharp sound is a TICK
- like what a clock does.

It's also the first half of a breath mint, as in "tic-tac", or the first third
of a child's game, "tic-tac-toe".

....

Oh... OH! That kind of thing... let's not forget "your" & "you're".

Frank
Mobile Audio

--

[Frank]

And could otherwise knowledgeable people please learn the difference
between disk and disc?

A disk, as in a hard disk drive (HDD) or a floppy (flexible) diskette,
is magnetic.

A disc, as in a CD (Compact Disc), DVD, or BD (Blu-ray Disc), is
optical.

In summary, if it's optical, it's disc. If it's magnetic, then it's
disk.

Thank you and have a good day!

--
Frank, Independent Consultant, New York, NY
[Please remove 'nojunkmail.' from address to reply via e-mail.]
Read Frank's thoughts on HDV at http://www.humanvalues.net/hdv/
[also covers AVCHD (including AVCCAM & NXCAM) and XDCAM EX].

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:53:41 -0400, Frank
wrote:

And could otherwise knowledgeable people please learn the difference
between disk and disc?

A disk, as in a hard disk drive (HDD) or a floppy (flexible) diskette,
is magnetic.

A disc, as in a CD (Compact Disc), DVD, or BD (Blu-ray Disc), is
optical.

In summary, if it's optical, it's disc. If it's magnetic, then it's
disk.

Thank you and have a good day!

Well, I'm going to disagree. Disk and disc are simply alternative
spellings. More specifically disk is a US and Canada-preferred
spelling of the English word disc.

If you want to distinguish between magnetic and optical discs (disks),
you need to specify.

d

[Bill Graham]

Gareth Magennis wrote:
"Tom McCreadie" wrote in message
...
A tic is a spasm of the facial muscles. A short sharp sound is a
TICK - like what a clock does.

And while we're on a roll, could the whole usenet/web-forum world now
please stop saying "revert back" instead of "revert" and "loose" when
they mean "lose" .
--
Tom McCreadie

Live at The London Palindrome - ABBA


And PLEASE learn the difference between "their", "there" and
"they're". It will only take 2 minutes. Really.

Is that 2 minutes, to minutes, too minutes or two minutes?

You are fighting a losing battle. Mrs Hughes, my fifth grade English teacher
is long gone, (I am 75) and very few people have learned much real English
since then. Even the Supreme Court thinks the second amendment says, "Only
the
Army can keep and bear arms."







Gareth.

[Bill Graham]

Gareth Magennis wrote:
"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:53:41 -0400, Frank
wrote:

And could otherwise knowledgeable people please learn the difference
between disk and disc?

A disk, as in a hard disk drive (HDD) or a floppy (flexible)
diskette, is magnetic.

A disc, as in a CD (Compact Disc), DVD, or BD (Blu-ray Disc), is
optical.

In summary, if it's optical, it's disc. If it's magnetic, then it's
disk.

Thank you and have a good day!

Well, I'm going to disagree. Disk and disc are simply alternative
spellings. More specifically disk is a US and Canada-preferred
spelling of the English word disc.



I assume the word comes from the latin "discus".
Which supports your assumption that us Brits got there first, and you
North Americans *******ised it.


Gareth.

Yes. I don't think there is any official difference between, "disc" and
"disk". Any more than there is an official difference between, "Mike, and,
"Mic".

[Frank]

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 17:36:55 GMT, in 'rec.audio.pro',
in article Will everyone stop saying tic,
(Don Pearce) wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:53:41 -0400, Frank
wrote:

And could otherwise knowledgeable people please learn the difference
between disk and disc?

A disk, as in a hard disk drive (HDD) or a floppy (flexible) diskette,
is magnetic.

A disc, as in a CD (Compact Disc), DVD, or BD (Blu-ray Disc), is
optical.

In summary, if it's optical, it's disc. If it's magnetic, then it's
disk.

Thank you and have a good day!

Well, I'm going to disagree. Disk and disc are simply alternative
spellings. More specifically disk is a US and Canada-preferred
spelling of the English word disc.

If you want to distinguish between magnetic and optical discs (disks),
you need to specify.


Well, I'm going to have to disagree with you, Don.

In my view, it's more than a simple case of alternative spellings.

Computer-related terms, and indeed most technical terms, cross
national (and cultural) boundaries.

The formal (and official) definition of CD is Compact Disc, not
Compact Disk.

The formal (and official) definition of BD is Blu-ray Disc, not
Blu-ray Disk. (And the correct abbreviation is BD, not BR.)

And surely you wouldn't write, discette, would you?

I can certainly accept American English and British English spelling
differences of words such as behavior and behaviour, color and colour,
center and centre, defense and defence, to name a few obvious
examples, but technical terms and expressions, for the sake of clarity
and good communication, should not be treated this way, especially in
the case of terms that have a more or less official definition (and
particular spelling) such as Blu-ray Disc.

And as far as hard disks are concerned, I guess that we have IBM to
thank (blame?) for that.

Back in the late 1960s/early 1970s, when I first became involved with
mainframe computer systems, I do know that since IBM was referring to
them as disks, that I certainly wasn't going to write reports and
memos with the spelling disc, and this despite the fact that I was
somewhat taken aback by the "disk" spelling that IBM had used in their
sales literature.

I vividly recall that every time I would read the word disk, my mind
would say, "no, the correct spelling is disc", but eventually I
trained myself to think and write disk. Sometimes, if you can't beat
them, you may as well join them.

Also, if I were to insert a Blu-ray Disc into my Blu-ray Disc player,
and were to write about it, I would write "disc" and not "disk".

P.S. Another one that bothers me is people with camcorders who say
that they're "filming".

If they were using a film-based motion picture camera, then the term
"filming" would be appropriate, but when using a camcorder, they're
"shooting video", not "filming", at least as far as I'm concerned.

Regards,

--
Frank, Independent Consultant, New York, NY
[Please remove 'nojunkmail.' from address to reply via e-mail.]
Read Frank's thoughts on HDV at http://www.humanvalues.net/hdv/
[also covers AVCHD (including AVCCAM & NXCAM) and XDCAM EX].

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 11:42:59 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Gareth Magennis wrote:
"Tom McCreadie" wrote in message
...
A tic is a spasm of the facial muscles. A short sharp sound is a
TICK - like what a clock does.

And while we're on a roll, could the whole usenet/web-forum world now
please stop saying "revert back" instead of "revert" and "loose" when
they mean "lose" .
--
Tom McCreadie

Live at The London Palindrome - ABBA


And PLEASE learn the difference between "their", "there" and
"they're". It will only take 2 minutes. Really.

Is that 2 minutes, to minutes, too minutes or two minutes?

You are fighting a losing battle. Mrs Hughes, my fifth grade English teacher
is long gone, (I am 75) and very few people have learned much real English
since then. Even the Supreme Court thinks the second amendment says, "Only
the
Army can keep and bear arms."

Whereas it actually says that the people can bear arms for the
purposes of maintaining a militia. No other reason is offered. Nothing
about defending oneself or simply looking hard.

d

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 14:53:47 -0400, Frank
wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 17:36:55 GMT, in 'rec.audio.pro',
in article Will everyone stop saying tic,
(Don Pearce) wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:53:41 -0400, Frank
wrote:

And could otherwise knowledgeable people please learn the difference
between disk and disc?

A disk, as in a hard disk drive (HDD) or a floppy (flexible) diskette,
is magnetic.

A disc, as in a CD (Compact Disc), DVD, or BD (Blu-ray Disc), is
optical.

In summary, if it's optical, it's disc. If it's magnetic, then it's
disk.

Thank you and have a good day!

Well, I'm going to disagree. Disk and disc are simply alternative
spellings. More specifically disk is a US and Canada-preferred
spelling of the English word disc.

If you want to distinguish between magnetic and optical discs (disks),
you need to specify.


Well, I'm going to have to disagree with you, Don.

In my view, it's more than a simple case of alternative spellings.

Computer-related terms, and indeed most technical terms, cross
national (and cultural) boundaries.

The formal (and official) definition of CD is Compact Disc, not
Compact Disk.

The formal (and official) definition of BD is Blu-ray Disc, not
Blu-ray Disk. (And the correct abbreviation is BD, not BR.)

And surely you wouldn't write, discette, would you?

I can certainly accept American English and British English spelling
differences of words such as behavior and behaviour, color and colour,
center and centre, defense and defence, to name a few obvious
examples, but technical terms and expressions, for the sake of clarity
and good communication, should not be treated this way, especially in
the case of terms that have a more or less official definition (and
particular spelling) such as Blu-ray Disc.

And as far as hard disks are concerned, I guess that we have IBM to
thank (blame?) for that.

Back in the late 1960s/early 1970s, when I first became involved with
mainframe computer systems, I do know that since IBM was referring to
them as disks, that I certainly wasn't going to write reports and
memos with the spelling disc, and this despite the fact that I was
somewhat taken aback by the "disk" spelling that IBM had used in their
sales literature.

I vividly recall that every time I would read the word disk, my mind
would say, "no, the correct spelling is disc", but eventually I
trained myself to think and write disk. Sometimes, if you can't beat
them, you may as well join them.

Also, if I were to insert a Blu-ray Disc into my Blu-ray Disc player,
and were to write about it, I would write "disc" and not "disk".


I have a hard disc in my computer.

P.S. Another one that bothers me is people with camcorders who say
that they're "filming".

If they were using a film-based motion picture camera, then the term
"filming" would be appropriate, but when using a camcorder, they're
"shooting video", not "filming", at least as far as I'm concerned.

Regards,

These words transcend technical accuracy - they are cultural. I Hoover
my house with a Dyson.

d

[John Williamson]

Frank wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 17:36:55 GMT, in 'rec.audio.pro',
in article Will everyone stop saying tic,
(Don Pearce) wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:53:41 -0400, Frank
wrote:

And could otherwise knowledgeable people please learn the difference
between disk and disc?

A disk, as in a hard disk drive (HDD) or a floppy (flexible) diskette,
is magnetic.

A disc, as in a CD (Compact Disc), DVD, or BD (Blu-ray Disc), is
optical.

In summary, if it's optical, it's disc. If it's magnetic, then it's
disk.

Thank you and have a good day!
Well, I'm going to disagree. Disk and disc are simply alternative
spellings. More specifically disk is a US and Canada-preferred
spelling of the English word disc.

If you want to distinguish between magnetic and optical discs (disks),
you need to specify.


Well, I'm going to have to disagree with you, Don.

In my view, it's more than a simple case of alternative spellings.

Computer-related terms, and indeed most technical terms, cross
national (and cultural) boundaries.

The formal (and official) definition of CD is Compact Disc, not
Compact Disk.

The formal (and official) definition of BD is Blu-ray Disc, not
Blu-ray Disk. (And the correct abbreviation is BD, not BR.)

And surely you wouldn't write, discette, would you?

I can certainly accept American English and British English spelling
differences of words such as behavior and behaviour, color and colour,
center and centre, defense and defence, to name a few obvious
examples, but technical terms and expressions, for the sake of clarity
and good communication, should not be treated this way, especially in
the case of terms that have a more or less official definition (and
particular spelling) such as Blu-ray Disc.

And as far as hard disks are concerned, I guess that we have IBM to
thank (blame?) for that.

Back in the late 1960s/early 1970s, when I first became involved with
mainframe computer systems, I do know that since IBM was referring to
them as disks, that I certainly wasn't going to write reports and
memos with the spelling disc, and this despite the fact that I was
somewhat taken aback by the "disk" spelling that IBM had used in their
sales literature.

I vividly recall that every time I would read the word disk, my mind
would say, "no, the correct spelling is disc", but eventually I
trained myself to think and write disk. Sometimes, if you can't beat
them, you may as well join them.

Also, if I were to insert a Blu-ray Disc into my Blu-ray Disc player,
and were to write about it, I would write "disc" and not "disk".

P.S. Another one that bothers me is people with camcorders who say
that they're "filming".

If they were using a film-based motion picture camera, then the term
"filming" would be appropriate, but when using a camcorder, they're
"shooting video", not "filming", at least as far as I'm concerned.

They put their footage on a CF or SD card, too, sometimes.
--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Bill Graham]

Frank wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 17:36:55 GMT, in 'rec.audio.pro',
in article Will everyone stop saying tic,
(Don Pearce) wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:53:41 -0400, Frank
wrote:

And could otherwise knowledgeable people please learn the difference
between disk and disc?

A disk, as in a hard disk drive (HDD) or a floppy (flexible)
diskette, is magnetic.

A disc, as in a CD (Compact Disc), DVD, or BD (Blu-ray Disc), is
optical.

In summary, if it's optical, it's disc. If it's magnetic, then it's
disk.

Thank you and have a good day!

Well, I'm going to disagree. Disk and disc are simply alternative
spellings. More specifically disk is a US and Canada-preferred
spelling of the English word disc.

If you want to distinguish between magnetic and optical discs
(disks), you need to specify.


Well, I'm going to have to disagree with you, Don.

In my view, it's more than a simple case of alternative spellings.

Computer-related terms, and indeed most technical terms, cross
national (and cultural) boundaries.

The formal (and official) definition of CD is Compact Disc, not
Compact Disk.

The formal (and official) definition of BD is Blu-ray Disc, not
Blu-ray Disk. (And the correct abbreviation is BD, not BR.)

And surely you wouldn't write, discette, would you?

I can certainly accept American English and British English spelling
differences of words such as behavior and behaviour, color and colour,
center and centre, defense and defence, to name a few obvious
examples, but technical terms and expressions, for the sake of clarity
and good communication, should not be treated this way, especially in
the case of terms that have a more or less official definition (and
particular spelling) such as Blu-ray Disc.

And as far as hard disks are concerned, I guess that we have IBM to
thank (blame?) for that.

Back in the late 1960s/early 1970s, when I first became involved with
mainframe computer systems, I do know that since IBM was referring to
them as disks, that I certainly wasn't going to write reports and
memos with the spelling disc, and this despite the fact that I was
somewhat taken aback by the "disk" spelling that IBM had used in their
sales literature.

I vividly recall that every time I would read the word disk, my mind
would say, "no, the correct spelling is disc", but eventually I
trained myself to think and write disk. Sometimes, if you can't beat
them, you may as well join them.

Also, if I were to insert a Blu-ray Disc into my Blu-ray Disc player,
and were to write about it, I would write "disc" and not "disk".

P.S. Another one that bothers me is people with camcorders who say
that they're "filming".

If they were using a film-based motion picture camera, then the term
"filming" would be appropriate, but when using a camcorder, they're
"shooting video", not "filming", at least as far as I'm concerned.

Regards,

I guess you don't accept the word, "tape" as a euphamism for "record"
either. It is hard for me to change my language in some cases, because at
75, I have been hearing and using some of these terms for many years.

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:38:54 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

If they were using a film-based motion picture camera, then the term
"filming" would be appropriate, but when using a camcorder, they're
"shooting video", not "filming", at least as far as I'm concerned.

Regards,

I guess you don't accept the word, "tape" as a euphamism for "record"
either. It is hard for me to change my language in some cases, because at
75, I have been hearing and using some of these terms for many years.

You say euphemism, but I presume you mean synonym. A CD is also a
record, but we only really use the word for a vinyl disc.

d

[Bill Graham]

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 11:42:59 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Gareth Magennis wrote:
"Tom McCreadie" wrote in message
...
A tic is a spasm of the facial muscles. A short sharp sound is a
TICK - like what a clock does.

And while we're on a roll, could the whole usenet/web-forum world
now please stop saying "revert back" instead of "revert" and
"loose" when they mean "lose" .
--
Tom McCreadie

Live at The London Palindrome - ABBA


And PLEASE learn the difference between "their", "there" and
"they're". It will only take 2 minutes. Really.

Is that 2 minutes, to minutes, too minutes or two minutes?

You are fighting a losing battle. Mrs Hughes, my fifth grade English
teacher is long gone, (I am 75) and very few people have learned
much real English since then. Even the Supreme Court thinks the
second amendment says, "Only the
Army can keep and bear arms."

Whereas it actually says that the people can bear arms for the
purposes of maintaining a militia. No other reason is offered. Nothing
about defending oneself or simply looking hard.

d

But the law doesn't say "for the purpose of maintaining a militia", and even
if it did, that wouldn't be a part of the law. The law says, "the right of
the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed", which tells me
that the right to keep and bear arms has always been there, and the law
simply guarantees that it won't be changed. It all seems pretty obvious to
me, but then, I had Mrs. Hughes, and most peoplke didn't. At 75, I am
getting very tired of trying to teach English to all those who didn't have
a, Mrs. Hughes.

Also, why do people keep adding, "itself" to, "We have nothing to fear but
fear?"

[Bill Graham]

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:38:54 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

If they were using a film-based motion picture camera, then the term
"filming" would be appropriate, but when using a camcorder, they're
"shooting video", not "filming", at least as far as I'm concerned.

Regards,

I guess you don't accept the word, "tape" as a euphamism for "record"
either. It is hard for me to change my language in some cases,
because at 75, I have been hearing and using some of these terms for
many years.

You say euphemism, but I presume you mean synonym. A CD is also a
record, but we only really use the word for a vinyl disc.

d

No. A synonym means the same thing. But tape doesn't mean record. It can be
a sticky strip used for sealing packages. It is a euphamism for record when
used in reference to what you do with a recording machine.

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:46:11 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 11:42:59 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Gareth Magennis wrote:
"Tom McCreadie" wrote in message
...
A tic is a spasm of the facial muscles. A short sharp sound is a
TICK - like what a clock does.

And while we're on a roll, could the whole usenet/web-forum world
now please stop saying "revert back" instead of "revert" and
"loose" when they mean "lose" .
--
Tom McCreadie

Live at The London Palindrome - ABBA


And PLEASE learn the difference between "their", "there" and
"they're". It will only take 2 minutes. Really.

Is that 2 minutes, to minutes, too minutes or two minutes?

You are fighting a losing battle. Mrs Hughes, my fifth grade English
teacher is long gone, (I am 75) and very few people have learned
much real English since then. Even the Supreme Court thinks the
second amendment says, "Only the
Army can keep and bear arms."

Whereas it actually says that the people can bear arms for the
purposes of maintaining a militia. No other reason is offered. Nothing
about defending oneself or simply looking hard.

d

But the law doesn't say "for the purpose of maintaining a militia", and even
if it did, that wouldn't be a part of the law. The law says, "the right of
the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed", which tells me
that the right to keep and bear arms has always been there, and the law
simply guarantees that it won't be changed. It all seems pretty obvious to
me, but then, I had Mrs. Hughes, and most peoplke didn't. At 75, I am
getting very tired of trying to teach English to all those who didn't have
a, Mrs. Hughes.

Also, why do people keep adding, "itself" to, "We have nothing to fear but
fear?"

No, it most certainly does not say that. The exact wording is:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free
State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed.

So the right to bear arms exists solely in the context of maintaining
a well-regulated militia. If you are simply going to pretend that the
bits you don't like aren't there you may as well throw the
constitution out right now.

d

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:51:09 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:38:54 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

If they were using a film-based motion picture camera, then the term
"filming" would be appropriate, but when using a camcorder, they're
"shooting video", not "filming", at least as far as I'm concerned.

Regards,

I guess you don't accept the word, "tape" as a euphamism for "record"
either. It is hard for me to change my language in some cases,
because at 75, I have been hearing and using some of these terms for
many years.

You say euphemism, but I presume you mean synonym. A CD is also a
record, but we only really use the word for a vinyl disc.

d

No. A synonym means the same thing. But tape doesn't mean record. It can be
a sticky strip used for sealing packages. It is a euphamism for record when
used in reference to what you do with a recording machine.

A euphemism is a socially acceptable term used in place of one that
would give offence. "Tape" and "Record" are synonyms in this context
because they specifically do mean the same thing. It is the original
meanings that differ.

And it is euphemism, not euphamism.

d

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 15:58:43 -0400, "Soundhaspriority"
wrote:



"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
How about prohibiting any and all uses of "impact" (verb or noun)? There
are
more-appropriate words.

We should keep our arguments on topic. RMS and peak power are the same.

Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511

The same as what? RMS isn't even a way of measuring power. It is
strictly for voltage and current.

d

[Bill Graham]

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:46:11 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 11:42:59 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Gareth Magennis wrote:
"Tom McCreadie" wrote in message
...
A tic is a spasm of the facial muscles. A short sharp sound is a
TICK - like what a clock does.

And while we're on a roll, could the whole usenet/web-forum world
now please stop saying "revert back" instead of "revert" and
"loose" when they mean "lose" .
--
Tom McCreadie

Live at The London Palindrome - ABBA


And PLEASE learn the difference between "their", "there" and
"they're". It will only take 2 minutes. Really.

Is that 2 minutes, to minutes, too minutes or two minutes?

You are fighting a losing battle. Mrs Hughes, my fifth grade
English teacher is long gone, (I am 75) and very few people have
learned much real English since then. Even the Supreme Court
thinks the second amendment says, "Only the
Army can keep and bear arms."

Whereas it actually says that the people can bear arms for the
purposes of maintaining a militia. No other reason is offered.
Nothing about defending oneself or simply looking hard.

d

But the law doesn't say "for the purpose of maintaining a militia",
and even if it did, that wouldn't be a part of the law. The law
says, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed", which tells me that the right to keep and bear arms has
always been there, and the law simply guarantees that it won't be
changed. It all seems pretty obvious to me, but then, I had Mrs.
Hughes, and most peoplke didn't. At 75, I am getting very tired of
trying to teach English to all those who didn't have a, Mrs. Hughes.

Also, why do people keep adding, "itself" to, "We have nothing to
fear but fear?"

No, it most certainly does not say that. The exact wording is:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free
State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed.

So the right to bear arms exists solely in the context of maintaining
a well-regulated militia. If you are simply going to pretend that the
bits you don't like aren't there you may as well throw the
constitution out right now.

d

I see you didn't have a Mrs. Hughes either. If it said, A well roasted side
of venison being necessary for the stomaches of the members of a free state,
the right of the peopole to keep and ber arms shall not be infringed, it
would still mean the same thing.

The law states that the people have a right, and this right shall not be
infringed. Why it shouldn't be infringed has nothing to do with the law. The
first part of the sentence tells me that they were talking about assault
weapons, and not hunting or target weapons, but even that is neither here
nor there. The law would still state that the people's right to keep and
bear arms will not be infringed.

[Bill Graham]

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:51:09 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:38:54 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

If they were using a film-based motion picture camera, then the
term "filming" would be appropriate, but when using a camcorder,
they're "shooting video", not "filming", at least as far as I'm
concerned.

Regards,

I guess you don't accept the word, "tape" as a euphamism for
"record" either. It is hard for me to change my language in some
cases, because at 75, I have been hearing and using some of these
terms for many years.

You say euphemism, but I presume you mean synonym. A CD is also a
record, but we only really use the word for a vinyl disc.

d

No. A synonym means the same thing. But tape doesn't mean record. It
can be a sticky strip used for sealing packages. It is a euphamism
for record when used in reference to what you do with a recording
machine.

A euphemism is a socially acceptable term used in place of one that
would give offence. "Tape" and "Record" are synonyms in this context
because they specifically do mean the same thing. It is the original
meanings that differ.

And it is euphemism, not euphamism.

d

Tape is a noun used in this context as a verb. (record) I still call it a
euphemism.

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 13:16:07 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:


No, it most certainly does not say that. The exact wording is:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free
State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed.

So the right to bear arms exists solely in the context of maintaining
a well-regulated militia. If you are simply going to pretend that the
bits you don't like aren't there you may as well throw the
constitution out right now.

d

I see you didn't have a Mrs. Hughes either. If it said, A well roasted side
of venison being necessary for the stomaches of the members of a free state,
the right of the peopole to keep and ber arms shall not be infringed, it
would still mean the same thing.

The law states that the people have a right, and this right shall not be
infringed. Why it shouldn't be infringed has nothing to do with the law. The
first part of the sentence tells me that they were talking about assault
weapons, and not hunting or target weapons, but even that is neither here
nor there. The law would still state that the people's right to keep and
bear arms will not be infringed.

You aren't a Christian by any chance, are you? You twist the
constitution the way a Christian does the bible.

d

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 13:18:58 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:51:09 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:38:54 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

If they were using a film-based motion picture camera, then the
term "filming" would be appropriate, but when using a camcorder,
they're "shooting video", not "filming", at least as far as I'm
concerned.

Regards,

I guess you don't accept the word, "tape" as a euphamism for
"record" either. It is hard for me to change my language in some
cases, because at 75, I have been hearing and using some of these
terms for many years.

You say euphemism, but I presume you mean synonym. A CD is also a
record, but we only really use the word for a vinyl disc.

d

No. A synonym means the same thing. But tape doesn't mean record. It
can be a sticky strip used for sealing packages. It is a euphamism
for record when used in reference to what you do with a recording
machine.

A euphemism is a socially acceptable term used in place of one that
would give offence. "Tape" and "Record" are synonyms in this context
because they specifically do mean the same thing. It is the original
meanings that differ.

And it is euphemism, not euphamism.

d

Tape is a noun used in this context as a verb. (record) I still call it a
euphemism.

That can only be because despite being told you have no idea what a
euphemism is. Or is the word "record" offensive to the normal,
right-minded person?

d

[Bill Graham]

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 13:16:07 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:


No, it most certainly does not say that. The exact wording is:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free
State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed.

So the right to bear arms exists solely in the context of
maintaining a well-regulated militia. If you are simply going to
pretend that the bits you don't like aren't there you may as well
throw the constitution out right now.

d

I see you didn't have a Mrs. Hughes either. If it said, A well
roasted side of venison being necessary for the stomaches of the
members of a free state, the right of the peopole to keep and ber
arms shall not be infringed, it would still mean the same thing.

The law states that the people have a right, and this right shall
not be infringed. Why it shouldn't be infringed has nothing to do
with the law. The first part of the sentence tells me that they were
talking about assault weapons, and not hunting or target weapons,
but even that is neither here nor there. The law would still state
that the people's right to keep and bear arms will not be infringed.

You aren't a Christian by any chance, are you? You twist the
constitution the way a Christian does the bible.

d

A compound sentence does not necessarily have to contain some connection
between the two parts. If the second amendment stated, "The moon being made
of green cheese, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed." it would still be the same law, neither better nor worse, and I
would still interpret it the same way. The founding fathers had no
obligation to justify any law they wrote into the document. If anything, the
first half of the second amendment gives me a hint that they were probably
talking about assault weapons, or those weapons that some invading army
might use to launch an assault on the United States. But in any case, that
first half of the sentence needs not be there and doesn't have to have
anything to do with the second half, which states the law, and does have to
be there. Why this is so hard for liberals to understand beats the hell out
of me.

And, no. I am not a Christian. I am an atheist. Not by choice. But I just
find it impossible to believe that this whole universe, over 30 billion
light years in diameter, was created by some kindly old man in the sky that
hovers over my bunk at night making sure that I get a good night's sleep.
Besides, this, "kindly old man" sits idly by while millions of small
creatures freeze and starve to death every Winter, and I don't think my nap
time is very important when compared to that.

[Bill Graham]

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 13:18:58 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:51:09 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:38:54 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

If they were using a film-based motion picture camera, then the
term "filming" would be appropriate, but when using a camcorder,
they're "shooting video", not "filming", at least as far as I'm
concerned.

Regards,

I guess you don't accept the word, "tape" as a euphamism for
"record" either. It is hard for me to change my language in some
cases, because at 75, I have been hearing and using some of these
terms for many years.

You say euphemism, but I presume you mean synonym. A CD is also a
record, but we only really use the word for a vinyl disc.

d

No. A synonym means the same thing. But tape doesn't mean record.
It can be a sticky strip used for sealing packages. It is a
euphamism for record when used in reference to what you do with a
recording machine.

A euphemism is a socially acceptable term used in place of one that
would give offence. "Tape" and "Record" are synonyms in this context
because they specifically do mean the same thing. It is the original
meanings that differ.

And it is euphemism, not euphamism.

d

Tape is a noun used in this context as a verb. (record) I still call
it a euphemism.

That can only be because despite being told you have no idea what a
euphemism is. Or is the word "record" offensive to the normal,
right-minded person?

d

"Some euphemisms are intended to amuse, while others are created to
mislead."

They are not all created to be politically correct.

[bob[_5_]]

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 08:10:00 -0400, Mike Rivers
wrote:

On 6/29/2011 7:29 AM, Audio1 wrote:

And please stop using unnecessary apostrophe's like this?

and get it's and its straight. and your and you're. and who's and
whose. and discreet and discrete. and rediculous is actually
ridiculous. and and and... but i'm an english teacher (who doesn't use
capitals much...) and would gladly trade all english knowledge for the
combined music and engineering knowledge of this ng! keep up the good
work and tell me which interface to buy!

[Mike Rivers]

On 6/29/2011 12:53 PM, Frank wrote:

A disk, as in a hard disk drive (HDD) or a floppy (flexible) diskette,
is magnetic.

A disc, as in a CD (Compact Disc), DVD, or BD (Blu-ray Disc), is
optical.

Why is that? And what's something round and flat that's not
a piece of computer hardware, like a phonograph record, or
something in your back that slips? And why?

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[Mike Rivers]

On 6/29/2011 2:48 PM, Bill Graham wrote:

Yes. I don't think there is any official difference between,
"disc" and "disk". Any more than there is an official
difference between, "Mike, and, "Mic".

I think that "Compact Disc" is a trademark.

And don't call me "Mic."


--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[Mike Rivers]

On 6/29/2011 3:05 PM, Don Pearce wrote:

These words transcend technical accuracy - they are cultural. I Hoover
my house with a Dyson.

Someone asked me what kind of Garmin I had. Then I
discovered that it's common for New Englanders to call any
portable GPG a "Garmin."

My Garmin is a Tom Tom.


--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 13:50:51 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 13:16:07 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:


No, it most certainly does not say that. The exact wording is:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free
State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed.

So the right to bear arms exists solely in the context of
maintaining a well-regulated militia. If you are simply going to
pretend that the bits you don't like aren't there you may as well
throw the constitution out right now.

d

I see you didn't have a Mrs. Hughes either. If it said, A well
roasted side of venison being necessary for the stomaches of the
members of a free state, the right of the peopole to keep and ber
arms shall not be infringed, it would still mean the same thing.

The law states that the people have a right, and this right shall
not be infringed. Why it shouldn't be infringed has nothing to do
with the law. The first part of the sentence tells me that they were
talking about assault weapons, and not hunting or target weapons,
but even that is neither here nor there. The law would still state
that the people's right to keep and bear arms will not be infringed.

You aren't a Christian by any chance, are you? You twist the
constitution the way a Christian does the bible.

d

A compound sentence does not necessarily have to contain some connection
between the two parts. If the second amendment stated, "The moon being made
of green cheese, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed." it would still be the same law, neither better nor worse, and I
would still interpret it the same way. The founding fathers had no
obligation to justify any law they wrote into the document. If anything, the
first half of the second amendment gives me a hint that they were probably
talking about assault weapons, or those weapons that some invading army
might use to launch an assault on the United States. But in any case, that
first half of the sentence needs not be there and doesn't have to have
anything to do with the second half, which states the law, and does have to
be there. Why this is so hard for liberals to understand beats the hell out
of me.

And, no. I am not a Christian. I am an atheist. Not by choice. But I just
find it impossible to believe that this whole universe, over 30 billion
light years in diameter, was created by some kindly old man in the sky that
hovers over my bunk at night making sure that I get a good night's sleep.
Besides, this, "kindly old man" sits idly by while millions of small
creatures freeze and starve to death every Winter, and I don't think my nap
time is very important when compared to that.

So that first part was really put in just for fun, was it? Are you
aware that they deliberated at length over every dot and comma in that
document?

d

[Mike Rivers]

On 6/29/2011 3:38 PM, Bill Graham wrote:

I guess you don't accept the word, "tape" as a euphamism for
"record" either.

I don't think "euphamism" is the right word for it, but I
frequently hear on radio news programs "Mr. Plybzxt
declined to be interviewed on tape." or "Let's roll the
tape." None of that stuff is tape based any more, not even
the reporter's field recorder.

I have started referring to "Recorder outputs" on a console,
though, rather than "Tape outputs," at least when I
remember. But they're still usually labeled "Tape."


--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 13:57:52 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 13:18:58 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:51:09 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:38:54 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

If they were using a film-based motion picture camera, then the
term "filming" would be appropriate, but when using a camcorder,
they're "shooting video", not "filming", at least as far as I'm
concerned.

Regards,

I guess you don't accept the word, "tape" as a euphamism for
"record" either. It is hard for me to change my language in some
cases, because at 75, I have been hearing and using some of these
terms for many years.

You say euphemism, but I presume you mean synonym. A CD is also a
record, but we only really use the word for a vinyl disc.

d

No. A synonym means the same thing. But tape doesn't mean record.
It can be a sticky strip used for sealing packages. It is a
euphamism for record when used in reference to what you do with a
recording machine.

A euphemism is a socially acceptable term used in place of one that
would give offence. "Tape" and "Record" are synonyms in this context
because they specifically do mean the same thing. It is the original
meanings that differ.

And it is euphemism, not euphamism.

d

Tape is a noun used in this context as a verb. (record) I still call
it a euphemism.

That can only be because despite being told you have no idea what a
euphemism is. Or is the word "record" offensive to the normal,
right-minded person?

d

"Some euphemisms are intended to amuse, while others are created to
mislead."

They are not all created to be politically correct.

Amuse or mislead. Which is it, do you suppose?

And here is yet another phrase you don't understand. The term
politically correct is an ironic one meaning the exact opposite of
itself. Politically correct means actually a lie, but politically
acceptable to the listener. As in "It is not actually correct, but it
is politically correct".

d

[Gareth Magennis]

"Bill Graham" wrote in message
...
Gareth Magennis wrote:
"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:53:41 -0400, Frank
wrote:

And could otherwise knowledgeable people please learn the difference
between disk and disc?

A disk, as in a hard disk drive (HDD) or a floppy (flexible)
diskette, is magnetic.

A disc, as in a CD (Compact Disc), DVD, or BD (Blu-ray Disc), is
optical.

In summary, if it's optical, it's disc. If it's magnetic, then it's
disk.

Thank you and have a good day!

Well, I'm going to disagree. Disk and disc are simply alternative
spellings. More specifically disk is a US and Canada-preferred
spelling of the English word disc.



I assume the word comes from the latin "discus".
Which supports your assumption that us Brits got there first, and you
North Americans *******ised it.


Gareth.

Yes. I don't think there is any official difference between, "disc" and
"disk". Any more than there is an official difference between, "Mike, and,
"Mic".



"Mic" has a clear and unique meaning. It is a simple abbreviation of
"Microphone" that everyone understands.
"Mike" is the name of millions of people on this planet.

Why do that?



Gareth.

[William Sommerwerck]

No, it most certainly does not say that. The exact wording is:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free
State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed.

So the right to bear arms exists solely in the context of
maintaining a well-regulated militia.

No, it doesn't. People have a right to keep and bear arms, simply as one of
hundreds of rights that people naturally have. The government also has the
right to make reasonable restrictions on the ownership and use of firearms.

Unfortunately, neither side wants to understand these things.

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 17:18:36 -0400, Mike Rivers
wrote:

On 6/29/2011 3:05 PM, Don Pearce wrote:

These words transcend technical accuracy - they are cultural. I Hoover
my house with a Dyson.

Someone asked me what kind of Garmin I had. Then I
discovered that it's common for New Englanders to call any
portable GPG a "Garmin."

My Garmin is a Tom Tom.

I presume that means Garmin is bigger than Tomtom over there. I think
it is probably the other way around this side of the pond. Luckily
here nobody uses a proper name - it is just a satnav.

d